Неоднословные глагольные терминологические образования в современных восточнославянских языках

МОКСЛО КАЛБОС КУЛТОРОС ИР ТЕРМИНОЛОГИЈОС ПРОБЛЕМОС ЛИЕТУВИУ КАЛБОТЫРОС КЛАУСИМАИ, XXIV (1985) ВИТАЛИЙ СТЕПАНОВИЧ СИДОРЕЦ MULTIWORD VERBAL TERMINOLOGICAL FORMATIONS IN MODERN EAST SLAVIC LANGUAGES The scientific and technological revolution has, as is well known, led to the emergence of numerous concepts that are given corresponding terminological designations in Russian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian. The principal means of term formation are nouns or combinations in which nouns function as the grammatical center: darsonvalization, surplus value; darsonvalization, surplus value; darsonvalization, additional value. However, as V. P. Danilenko emphasizes, “the range of concepts being named is broader than the semantic possibilities of the noun”1. Developing this idea, she notes that contemporary specialist literature also uses other means to designate terms, in particular verbs and verbal combinations. Terminological verbal combinations, which are communicative equivalents (a term coined by Prof. V. M. Nikitevich) of verbs, are numerous and varied in how they represent denotata. Some combinations consist of components, each of which realizes a particular denotatum, for example: apply a bandage, cover with asphalt, cover with film; apply a bandage, cover with asphalt, cover with film; apply a bandage, cover with asphalt, cover with film. The ability of combinations of this type to “contract” into verbs does not eliminate the corresponding semes. Thus, the seme “to cover the surface of something with something” is implicitly present in the verb to asphalt. Other combinations include components that are unequal in their denotative properties, for example: carry out synthesis, give an injection, subject to tube polymerization; carry out synthesis, give an injection, subject to tube polymerization; carry out synthesis, give an injection, undergo tube polymerization. In these combinations, the verbal component does not realize the primary seme but retains its general categorical meaning—the idea of action. To a certain extent desemanticized and delexicalized, it assumes the function of a classifying marker—a kind of 1 Даниленко В. П. Лексико-семантические и грамматические особенности слов-терминов.—В кн.: Исследования по русской терминологии. М., 1971, с. 50. 132 formant. The semantic center of the combination—an abstract noun—resembles the base of a derived word in its communicative function. When attention is focused on combinations with a delexicalized component (which we shall call verb-anominal formations), the question naturally arises of the processes by which these units are generated and formed, as well as how they function in modern East Slavic languages. From the perspective of derivation theory, units at a given level are considered not as items supplied in a list or directly represented in a text, but as the result of a generative process that forms more complex units from simpler ones according to specific rules2. What, then, is a verb-anominal formation as a derived unit? Outwardly, explicitly, it is a syntactic-model-based phrase. In essence, however, it is a “non-univerbated” word, or more precisely, a communicative equivalent of a word that realizes a single denotatum. Given the functional proximity noted above between the components of a verb-anominal formation and the structural components (formant and base) of a derived verb, it is logical to assert that the derivation of a verb-anominal formation is essentially morphological rather than syntactic. The functional-semantic category of verbality, at whose center are verbs and at whose periphery are combinations of this and other types, has “rented” syntactic models that, in the course of development, have acquired derivational meaning at the level of word formation. Verbanominants, the overwhelming majority of which belong to the literary register, are widespread and continue to develop actively in modern East Slavic languages. In the modern era, scientific and technical literature is the main “supplier” of new verbanominants, because processes, actions, and phenomena cannot always be designated by means of verbs. The word-formation mechanism that replenishes the center of the functional-semantic category of verbhood cannot “produce” a ready-made, fully formed word for every instance. Naturally, the category of verbhood mobilizes other linguistic means, whose organization into certain units (e.g., verbanominants) is oriented toward the units of the center: to engage in aerogel therapy, to undergo mechanical destruction, to lead to divergence; to engage in aerogel therapy, to undergo mechanical destruction, to lead to divergence; to engage in aerogel therapy, to undergo mechanical destruction, to lead (give rise) to divergence (cause divergence). Many terminological verb-anominal formations from the scientific and technical register migrate into other registers, for example, into journalistic prose: 2 Сильницкий Г. Г. Теория деривации и ее место в системе лингвистических дисциплин. — В кн.: Теоретические аспекты деривации. Пермь, 1982, с. 4. 133 “Lenin’s brilliant intellect absorbed the finest achievements of world culture and gave a powerful impetus to the comprehensive development of Marxism” (Uchit. gaz., 1981, 23 Apr., p. 1); “The victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution undermined the entire system of exploitative relations and gave impetus to the revolutionary movement throughout the world” (Gomel’skaya pravda, 1980, 28 Oct., p. 1); “The celebration of this anniversary will add another memorable page to the chronicle of the great friendship of the Russian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian peoples, all the brother peoples of our country, and will give new impetus to work on patriotic and internationalist education” (Visnyk AN URSR, 1981, No. 8, p. 6). The problem of how terminological verbal nominants function in Russian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian is highly relevant to contemporary linguistic scholarship. It is readily resolved for verbal nominants such as to conduct fire, to undergo mechanodestruction, which have no synonymous verb equivalents, and is much more complex when verbal nominants are not the only means of expressing a given action. In the modern East Slavic languages, for example, the verbal nominants to lodge (file) an appeal, to lodge (file) an appeal, to lodge (file) an appeal are represented, along with their synonymous verbs to appeal, to appeal, to appeal. Consulting explanatory dictionaries shows that the verbs are recorded with two meanings, one of which, the specialized meaning, is realized by the verbal nominants cited above. The verbs to certify, to certify, to certify have two or three meanings; one of these is conveyed by the verbal nominants to give certification, to give certification, to give certification. In the explanatory dictionaries of the modern East Slavic languages, the verbs to preserve, to preserve, to preserve are listed with three meanings. Thus, the four-volume Dictionary of the Russian Language gives the following definition of the word to preserve: “1. To turn (or make) into canned food (sense 1). 2. Specialized. To protect (or keep) from deterioration or destruction by means of special treatment or the creation of special storage conditions. 3. To temporarily suspend (or halt) the course, development, or activity of something.”3 The verbal nominants to carry out preservation, to carry out preservation, to carry out preservation convey the third meaning. For example: “Vladimir Kovalyonok and Aleksandr Ivanchenkov are already carrying out the preservation of numerous systems of Salyut-6” (Izvestiya, 1978, 31 Oct., p. 3); “Uladzimir Kavalyonak and Alyaksandr Ivanchankau are already carrying out the preservation of numerous systems of Salyut-6”; “Volodymyr Kovalyonok and Oleksandr Ivanchenkov are already carrying out the preservation of numerous systems of Salyut-6”. As we can see, verbal nominants are narrower in meaning and less polysemous by their very nature, and in a certain sense they “unburden” polysemous verbs. Naturally, in this respect, periphrastic units are better suited to the requirements of terminologization than verbs. 3 Словарь русского языка.— М.: Русский язык, 1982, т. 2, с. 91. 134 Using verbal nominants in one case and verbs in another diversifies the description and makes it more accessible. For example: “The prefixes по-, с-, and о- provide complete aspectualization (instead of are completely aspectualized. — S. V.) regardless of the meaning of the verb stem. Other prefixes are completely aspectualized in combination with verbs having related semantic stems” (Avilova N. S. Vid glagola i semantika glagol’nogo slova. — M., 1976, p. 176); “The prefixes по-, с-, and о- provide complete aspectualization regardless of the meaning of the verb stem. Other prefixes are completely aspectualized in combination with verbs having related semantic stems”; “The prefixes по-, с-, and о- provide complete aspectualization regardless of the meaning of the verb stem. Other prefixes are completely aspectualized in combination with verbs having related semantic stems.” Verbal nominants can make up for verbs with respect to aspect. The verbs штурмовать, штурмаваць, штурмувати ‘to storm’ are imperfective, whereas verbal nominants can be either imperfective or perfective, for example: брать (взять) штурмом ‘to take by storm’; браць (узяць) штурмам ‘to take by storm’; брати (взяти) штурмом ‘to take by storm’. Verbal nominants also supply missing verb forms. Thus, in Russian, the imperfective adverbial participle is not formed from the verb пахать ‘to plow’. This form is available with the verbal nominant выполнять (осуществлять, производить, делать) пахоту ‘to carry out (perform, conduct, do) plowing’—выполняя (осуществляя, производя, делая) пахоту ‘while carrying out (performing, conducting, doing) plowing’. The same applies in Belarusian: араць ‘to plow’—(?), выконваць (рабіць) ворьіва ‘to carry out (do) plowing’—выконваючы (робячы) ворьіва ‘while carrying out (doing) plowing’. In Ukrainian, the imperfective adverbial participle of the verb орати ‘to plow’ is formed: орючи ‘while plowing’. However, it is rarely used, especially in its specialized, terminological meaning. Here, it is more natural to form it from the verbal nominant виконувати (робити) оранку ‘to carry out (do) plowing’—виконуючи (роблячи) оранку ‘while carrying out (doing) plowing’: “Always plowing well and to a high standard across the slopes, they remained true to themselves this time as well” (radio broadcast)—“Always carrying out plowing well and to a high standard across the slopes, they remained true to themselves this time as well.” Verbal nominants often designate processes more precisely in terms of manner of action than synonymous verbs do. Unlike the verbs дестабилизировать, дестабілізаваць, дестабілізувати ‘to destabilize’, the verbal nominants вести к дестабилизации, весці да дэстабілізацыі, вести до дестабілізації ‘to lead to destabilization’ convey a more prolonged but less intense action with a resultative nuance. For example: “The Dutch communists resolutely condemned the aggressive foreign-policy course of the US administration, which leads to the destabilization of the international situation”; “The Dutch communists resolutely condemned the aggressive foreign-policy course of the US administration, which leads to the destabilization of the international situation”; “The Dutch communists resolutely condemned the aggressive foreign-policy course of the US administration, which leads to de- 135 стабілізації міжнародної обстановки» (Радянська Україна, 1980, 10 июня, с. 3). Более интенсивным воспринимается действие, выраженное вербаноминантами подвергать аресту, падвергаць арышту, піддава-ти арешту, чем глаголами арестовать, арыштаваць (арыштоуваць), заарештвати (заарештоувати). Глаголы экспериментировать, эксперыментаваць, экспериментувати нейтральны к оппозиции одноактность—многоактность способов действия. Ее терминируют вербаноминанты проводить (провести) эксперимент — проводить (провести) эксперименты, праводзіць (правесці) эксперымент — праводзіць (правесці) эксперыменты, проводити (провести) експеримент — проводити (провести) експерименти. The use of a verbal nominant instead of a synonymous verb may be determined by various structural and semantic features of the context. The replacement, for example, of the verbal nominant to provide a classification with the verb to classify is prevented by the adjectives particular, semantic in the following context: “The number and diverse semantics of verbs entering into the aspectual opposition of the second type do not even allow an approximate particular semantic classification of these verbs” (Avilova N. S. Vid glagola i semantika glagol’nogo slova.— M., 1976, p. 186). The Ukrainian verbal nominant здійснювати накопичення (‘to carry out accumulation’) is self-sufficient and does not require an object, unlike the verb накопичувати (‘to accumulate’) in the sentence: “Only such labor can create a product that… makes it possible to carry out accumulation for the further development of production and the satisfaction of society’s various needs” (Sotsializm i pratsia.— Kyiv, 1978, p. 42) — “Only such labor can create a product that… makes it possible to carry out accumulation for the further development of production and the satisfaction of society’s various needs.” Several factors explain why terminological verbal nominants cannot be replaced in the following contexts: “It (the pasture — S. V.) is divided into paddocks, so cyclical grazing can be carried out, and fresh grass is always available in reserve”; “It (the pasture.— S. V.) is divided into paddocks, so cyclical grazing can be carried out, and fresh grass is always available in reserve” (Gomel’skaya pravda, 1980, 10 June, p. 2). “It (the pasture.— S. V.) is divided into paddocks, so cyclical grazing can be carried out, and fresh grass is always available in reserve.” First, the verbs to graze down, to graze down, to graze are in common use and have a colloquial tinge; second, their combinations with adverbs formed from the adjectives cyclical, cyclical, cyclical are unnatural from the standpoint of literary usage; and third, the verbs are “not self-sufficient” and require complements. 136 There are terminological verb-nominants whose semantic center is an adjective (or another word) grammatically dependent on a noun. Such a noun has sufficiently general semantics and requires a certain degree of specification by the dependent word, e.g.: to conduct reconnaissance operations — to reconnoiter, to exert a damping effect — to damp, to carry out repair operations — to repair; вести розвідувальні дії — розвідувати, справляти демпфуючу дію — демпфувати, здійснювати ремонтні операції — ремонтувати. Thus, verb-nominants, considered predominantly from a typological perspective, display considerable distinctiveness in naming processes, actions, and phenomena. They are undoubtedly important elements in the terminological system of each of the modern East Slavic languages.